You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.
Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline800-272-390024 hours a day, 365 days a yearFree, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline98824/7Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline866-232-84849:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a weekLicensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat.Text: 646-586-5283
In a medical emergency, call 911.
More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.
Research
29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 11,826–11,850 of 16,727 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 474 of 670)· 29,780 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)
From OpenAlex; 15,255 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.
A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.
We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.
TAR DNA binding protein 43 kDa (TDP-43), for instance, has been shown to cause frontotemporal dementia as well as some cases of familial ALS, and is associated with frontotemporal dysfunction in ALS. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Neuroinformatics·2016-07-01
We present a comparative split-half resampling analysis of various data driven feature selection and classification methods for the whole brain voxel-based classification analysis of anatomical magnetic resonance images. 5 key findings →
We find a notable discord between physician opinion, reported practice, and the literature regarding PEG tubes in advanced dementia that reveals some of the barriers to decreasing the referral of these patients for PEG. 2 key findings →
One hundred and ninety-one DKQs from Indian and 55 DKQs from Caucasian (white UK/Irish/European) older people were included in the analyses. 2 key findings →
In its early stages, Parkinson's disease (P.D.) may be difficult to distinguish from major depression (M.D.) leading to inappropriate management. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Neurocase·2003-04-01
We describe a 76-year-old man (ADY) with dynamic aphasia in the setting of a degenerative frontal lobe dementia: primary progressive dynamic aphasia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Neurologic clinics·2016-02-01
Assessing the mental status of patients with a neurobehavioral disorder is a critical element in the diagnosis and treatment of these patients. 5 key findings →
A key challenge to adults with Down syndrome (DS) as they age is an increased risk for cognitive decline, dementia, and Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Declines in adaptive behavior were examined in a study of dementia in adults with Down syndrome and other forms of mental retardation. 2 key findings →
Two genes on chromosome 21, namely dual specificity tyrosine phosphorylation-regulated kinase 1A (Dyrk1A) and regulator of calcineurin 1 (RCAN1), have been implicated in some of the phenotypic characteristics of Down syndrome, including the early onset of Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
The amyloid precursor protein (APP) gene codes for the precursor to the beta-protein found in the amyloid deposits of Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →
The survival of cultured mouse hippocampal neurons was found to be greatly enhanced by micromolar concentrations of the excitatory neurotransmitter glutamate. 3 key findings →
It has been clearly established that there is an increased incidence of early onset dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT) in people who have Down syndrome. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·1997-02-01
In order to study whether Alzheimer-like neuropathological changes involve the central histaminergic system we measured the concentration of histamine, its precursor histidine as well as the activity of histidine decarboxylase (HDC) and histamine-N-methyl-transferase (HMT) in frontal cortex of aging Down syndrome (DS) patients, Alzheimer patients and control individuals. 3 key findings →
The activities of red blood cell enzymes that scavenge the superoxide radical and hydrogen peroxide were measured in severely to profoundly retarded adult Down syndrome (DS) patients with and without manifestations of Alzheimer disease (AD), and control individuals matched for sex, age, and time of blood sampling. 4 key findings →
We identified by a monoclonal antibody-based immunoradiometric assay high concentrations of an exocrine pancreatic protein called pancreatic thread protein (PTP) in several areas of Alzheimer disease (AD) brain. 2 key findings →
Reduced spine densities and age-dependent accumulation of amyloid β and tau pathology are shared features of Down syndrome (DS) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is the common term used to define the deposition of amyloid in the walls of medium- and small-size leptomeningeal and cortical arteries, arterioles and, less frequently, capillaries and veins. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·2002-06-01
The gene encoding the beta-site amyloid precursor protein cleaving enzyme 2 (BACE2) has been determined to be located on the long arm of chromosome 21 at 21q22.3. 5 key findings →
Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription
label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled.
Show only studies that are free to read
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor,
and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a
scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the
difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself,
so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.
Journal tierup to 10 pts
Journal's citation recordup to 4 pts
Study designup to 12 pts
Strength of evidenceup to 5 pts
Peer-review validationup to 10 pts
How recentup to 5 pts
Sample sizeup to 4 pts
Effect reportedup to 3 pts
Studied in peopleup to 3 pts
Randomised / blindedup to 2 pts
Times citedup to 7 pts
Citations per yearup to 5 pts
Impact for its field and yearup to 6 pts
Cited by studies hereup to 6 pts
Still being citedup to 4 pts
Senior author's track recordup to 4 pts
Institution's track recordup to 3 pts
Multi-centre collaborationup to 3 pts
Indexed in PubMedup to 2 pts
Free to readup to 2 pts
Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we
could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be
worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science,
Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed
journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the
tier-3 journals apart.
Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a
missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores
zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and
the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed
article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or
a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.
We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not
work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by
that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.
The score is computed from the published data alone and is
reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.
See the whole rubric drawn out →
— four charts covering all 29,780 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap
bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on
stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of
it. It holds 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%),
plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here,
that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.
1,037 records (3.5% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 of those are preprints posted before any
journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card
on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a
peer-reviewed article.